Retire Brad Park's #?

[chosen]

If we didn't trade him, sure. Let's do Doug Weight while we're at it. There's about 20 # s that should be retired before Brad Park is mentioned.

Bet you can't name 3 that you saw play. By the way, did you see Park as a Ranger?

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

Bet you can't name 3 that you saw play. By the way, did you see Park as a Ranger?

Bet I can: Maloney, Greschner, Sandstrom, Vanbiesbrouck, Patrick to start with. What do I win?

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Bet I can: Maloney, Greschner, Sandstrom, Vanbiesbrouck, Patrick to start with. What do I win?

The dunce of the month award.

You are saying that James Patrick and Tomas Sandstrom were better Rangers than Brad Park?

 

[chosen]

Bet I can: Maloney, Greschner, Sandstrom, Vanbiesbrouck, Patrick to start with. What do I win?

You have a choice between 2 prizes. A plaque identifying you as not understanding the game or one that states you never saw a game.

Your answer is so absurd that I don't even know which Maloney you are talking about.

 

[Ratelleitlikeitis]

Bet I can: Maloney, Greschner, Sandstrom, Vanbiesbrouck, Patrick to start with. What do I win?

None of these compare to names previously mentioned.

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

The dunce of the month award.

You are saying that James Patrick and Tomas Sandstrom were better Rangers than Brad Park?

It's not fashionable to give yourself an award, but I'll look the other way Dunce.

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

You have a choice between 2 prizes. A plaque identifying you as not understanding the game or one that states you never saw a game.

Your answer is so absurd that I don't even know which Maloney you are talking about.

Your thought that Brad Park should have his number retired shows a lack of understanding on how merit works in general.

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

None of these compare to names previously mentioned.

I was asked about ones I've seen play not guys from the 60s and before which were the majority of the names previously mentioned. Context is key.

 

[chosen]

Your thought that Brad Park should have his number retired shows a lack of understanding on how merit works in general.

So, which Maloney is more deserving than Park?

In trying to prove your point you either stated something not even you believe or you are unbelievably unaware of your lack of understanding of the game.

I have also surmised that you never saw Park in a Rangers uniform because the alternative is downright scary.

 

[bernmeister]

Park has to be one of the top 3 most complete players to wear the uniform. He did it all at a high level, 2nd only to a guy some say was the best to play the game. But he did it in a handful of years. I guess it comes down to what matters most, the term or the impact he made.

Henrik's #30 will be there, book it.

Voice of someone who knows; you said it well.
We should be grateful we had him in his prime.

Yes, he deserves it.

 

[bernmeister]

As for the original question:

1. No cup for Park.
2. Not with the Rangers long enough.

No jersey retirement. Kills me to apply this to Jean Ratelle, but he also should not have his # retired.

Henrik? The cup rule applies. However, if he plays 18 years in NY, owns all of the club records and such, it should be considered. #7 and #1 did not win cups either.

I give you points for not being a hypocrite.

However, I disagree w/1+2.

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

So, which Maloney is more deserving than Park?

In trying to prove your point you either stated something not even you believe or you are unbelievably unaware of your lack of understanding of the game.

I have also surmised that you never saw Park in a Rangers uniform because the alternative is downright scary.

Answers below cranky old man:

Don
That's a leading question based on false premise but answer is neither
Never saw Park in any uniform live and the alternative doesn't seem scary.

I think highly of Park but promoting a player for a banner who is not in the Rangers top ten in any major stat category, who hasn't won a cup, who played less than 500 games for the club, is not considered a "founder" is a short cut to thinking and indicates a serious lapse in judgement. The only argument I've heard was that he was the 2nd best defenseman in the league and best for a very good club over his 7 years. That's an extremely weak argument, stop your bromance with him it's embarrassing.

 

[bernmeister]

The Cup argument is beyond stupid. Should Hasek be retired in Buffalo? Bourque in Boston?

Graves was perhaps the 4th or 5th most important Ranger on a Cup team. If they lose game 7 to Vancouver, does that sway you away from Graves? That would mean a puck hitting a post instead of going in could determine who is worthy. And it was that close. If Park played 7 in N.Y. and only 3 In Boston, would that be a factor to you? If Orr got hurt in the finals against the Rangers and the Rangers won, would Park then deserve it. Some of you create rules out of thin air and then defend your stance as if it were somehow based in fact.

If 7 years is not enough and 10 is, where is your factual cutoff line?

Very well said.

I also want to add that it's one thing if someone ups and takes a hike for some extra dough.

It's another thing if a total power hungry *&!# Emile Francis, feeling like he had to make a statement and show this team he would trade you just because he could, moves you against your will.

Park played when there was no leverage.
If you wanted to play hockey, that's it.
You could sit out and deny your services, at which point a GM at some point decided it was worth it to pay you, maybe a little extra.

But that was it.
Park and Ratelle were LOVED by Ranger fans.
Francis moved them to put his personal imprint on the team.

Park/Ratelle should not be penalized.

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

So, which Maloney is more deserving than Park?

In trying to prove your point you either stated something not even you believe or you are unbelievably unaware of your lack of understanding of the game.

I have also surmised that you never saw Park in a Rangers uniform because the alternative is downright scary.

Answers below cranky old man:

Don
That's a leading question based on false premise but answer is neither
Never saw Park in any uniform live and the alternative doesn't seem scary.

I think highly of Park but promoting a player for a banner who is not in the Rangers top ten in any major stat category, who hasn't won a cup, who played less than 500 games for the club, is not considered a "founder" is a short cut to thinking and indicates a serious lapse in judgement. The only argument I've heard was that he was the 2nd best defenseman in the league and best for a very good club over his 7 years. That's an extremely weak argument, stop your bromance with him it's embarrassing.

 

[bernmeister]

Answers below cranky old man:

Don
That's a leading question based on false premise but answer is neither
Never saw Park in any uniform live and the alternative doesn't seem scary.

I think highly of Park but promoting a player for a banner who is not in the Rangers top ten in any major stat category, who hasn't won a cup, who played less than 500 games for the club, is not considered a "founder" is a short cut to thinking and indicates a serious lapse in judgement. The only argument I've heard was that he was the 2nd best defenseman in the league and best for a very good club over his 7 years. That's an extremely weak argument, stop your bromance with him it's embarrassing.

You're entitled to your opinion.
Mine is, respectfully, on this issue you're wrong.

The only reason Park is not in that top 10 --- setting aside for the moment that is a legit cutoff point --- is because a petty little man had to try to show he was still large and in charge.

You not acknowledging that is only rubbing salt in the open wound.

Do yourself a favor, and I mean YOU , not to be snarky or whatever, just for your own edification. Hunt down some old tapes, etc. Check out Park actually playing. The guy was truly a very special player.

If you REALLY have a clue as to how special Park was and you still don't want him to have his # retired, we can all have good faith and hopefully a good discussion.

But I gather since you don't appreciate him, it's a non-starter for you.

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

You're entitled to your opinion.
Mine is, respectfully, on this issue you're wrong.

The only reason Park is not in that top 10 --- setting aside for the moment that is a legit cutoff point --- is because a petty little man had to try to show he was still large and in charge.

You not acknowledging that is only rubbing salt in the open wound.

Do yourself a favor, and I mean YOU , not to be snarky or whatever, just for your own edification. Hunt down some old tapes, etc. Check out Park actually playing. The guy was truly a very special player.

If you REALLY have a clue as to how special Park was and you still don't want him to have his # retired, we can all have good faith and hopefully a good discussion.

But I gather since you don't appreciate him, it's a non-starter for you.

I wish he wasn't traded and we'd be having a different conversation. No doubt he was all that was billed but facts are facts regarding, in my opinion, reasons that he shouldn't have a banner. Don't know much about the Emile politics angle. Agree that Stats are just part of the recipe, nothing should be an automatic cutoff.

 

[IMLACHnME]

"*&!# Emile Francis"?

Very well said.

I also want to add that it's one thing if someone ups and takes a hike for some extra dough.

It's another thing if a total power hungry *&!# Emile Francis, feeling like he had to make a statement and show this team he would trade you just because he could, moves you against your will.

Park played when there was no leverage.
If you wanted to play hockey, that's it.
You could sit out and deny your services, at which point a GM at some point decided it was worth it to pay you, maybe a little extra.

But that was it.
Park and Ratelle were LOVED by Ranger fans.
Francis moved them to put his personal imprint on the team.

Park/Ratelle should not be penalized.

Your description of Emile Francis and explanation of his motivation for making that trade indicate that you know little about him or his Rangers team of the 60s/70s. He had been the GM - and usually the coach - for more than a decade when he made that trade early in the 1975-76 season. That was his team, he hardly had to "put his personal imprint on the team." In fact, the 1975-76 season would be his last on Broadway.

The Rangers had been in steady decline since the 1971-72 season when they finished with 109 points; after that they had 102 (72-73), 94 (73-74) and 88 (74-75). In fact, in the playoffs of 1975, they were defeated in the first round by the New York Islanders. You don't think there was reason enough to "shake up" the roster?

Early on during the 1975-76 season, Eddie Giacomin had been waived, and wound up with Detroit. Older fans of the Blueshirts will well recall his first game back at MSG.

After 13 games, with his team 5-7-1, Francis made the big trade. Unfortunately, the Rangers continued to struggle, and "*&!# Emile Francis" was fired.

 

[chosen]

Answers below cranky old man:

Don
That's a leading question based on false premise but answer is neither
Never saw Park in any uniform live and the alternative doesn't seem scary.

I think highly of Park but promoting a player for a banner who is not in the Rangers top ten in any major stat category, who hasn't won a cup, who played less than 500 games for the club, is not considered a "founder" is a short cut to thinking and indicates a serious lapse in judgement. The only argument I've heard was that he was the 2nd best defenseman in the league and best for a very good club over his 7 years. That's an extremely weak argument, stop your bromance with him it's embarrassing.

Now that I know you did not see him, it makes a little sense. If Callahan signs here for another two years he will qualify for the rafters under your reasoning. His career will be very similar to Maloney's.

If you are concerned about stats, how many Rangers put up more points while he was here, and he was a defenseman.

What is embarrassing is suggesting that Don Maloney is more deserving than Park.

If there was a vote here on which one deserves it, you would be hard-pressed to get 5% who agree with you.

 

[Crease]

If your balancing test has Don Maloney more worthy of number retirement than Brad Park, then I think your balancing test needs some work. And FWIW, I don't think Park is deserving.

It would kind of be like if the Dodgers retired Mike Piazza's number. They're still struggling with that question.

 

[chosen]

If your balancing test has Don Maloney more worthy of number retirement than Brad Park, then I think your balancing test needs some work. And FWIW, I don't think Park is deserving.

It would kind of be like if the Dodgers retired Mike Piazza's number. They're still struggling with that question.

If Park had been on a Cup winner in N.Y., would he be deserving?

 

[Crease]

If Park had been on a Cup winner in N.Y., would he be deserving?

It definitely helps his case. Not sure it's dispositive though. Conn Smythe and it probably gets done without thinking twice.

EDIT: Again, I have awfully high standards for number retirements. I don't think Graves deserved the honor. I'm actually on the fence about Messier too. Leaves for money, only to come back and sink the ship with his ego. He left a very sour taste in my mouth long before he retired.

 

[chosen]

It definitely helps his case. Not sure it's dispositive though. Conn Smythe and it probably gets done without thinking twice.

EDIT: Again, I have awfully high standards for number retirements. I don't think Graves deserved the honor. I'm actually on the fence about Messier too. Leaves for money, only to come back and sink the ship with his ego. He left a very sour taste in my mouth long before he retired.

And I feel the winning of a Cup is totally irrelevant to the discussion.

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

Now that I know you did not see him, it makes a little sense. If Callahan signs here for another two years he will qualify for the rafters under your reasoning. His career will be very similar to Maloney's.

If you are concerned about stats, how many Rangers put up more points while he was here, and he was a defenseman.

What is embarrassing is suggesting that Don Maloney is more deserving than Park.

If there was a vote here on which one deserves it, you would be hard-pressed to get 5% who agree with

Let facts be submitted before a candid world. Maloney, who I don't think should have one either, is the perfect litmus test.

Games: BP 465. DM 653
Pts:BP 378 DM 502
Cups: BP 0 DM 0
All Star: BP 6 DM 2 - well you got me here
Trophies: BP 0 DM 0
Intangibles/likability: BP 10 DM 8

So besides being an excellent player for the club for 7 years, why on earth should he get a banner?

 

[Crease]

Let facts be submitted before a candid world. Maloney, who I don't think should have one either, is the perfect litmus test.

Games: BP 465. DM 653
Pts:BP 378 DM 502
Cups: BP 0 DM 0
All Star: BP 6 DM 2 - well you got me here
Trophies: BP 0 DM 0
Intangibles/likability: BP 10 DM 8

So besides being an excellent player for the club for 7 years, why on earth should he get a banner?

Facts can become useless without context, as they are here.

A defenseman with 378 points in 465 games. A forward with 502 points in 653 games. When put in the context of the different positions they played, one is much much more impressive than the other.

And with regards to trophies, a little context helps too. If generational talent Bobby Orr doesn't lace them up, Park wins four Norrises. The voting records support that. If generational talent Wayne Gretzky doesn't lace them up, Don Maloney wins zero Art Rosses, zero Rocket Richards, zero Harts, and so on. The voting records support that also.

Park is miles ahead of Maloney in terms of what he did for this franchise. And I mean miles. That doesn't mean he should get a banner, but context is important when evaluating a player's resume and comparing one player to another.

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

Facts can become useless without context, as they are here.

A defenseman with 378 points in 465 games. A forward with 502 points in 653 games. When put in the context of the different positions they played, one is much much more impressive than the other.

And with regards to trophies, a little context helps too. If generational talent Bobby Orr doesn't lace them up, Park wins four Norrises. The voting records support that. If generational talent Wayne Gretzky doesn't lace them up, Don Maloney wins zero Art Rosses, zero Rocket Richards, zero Harts, and so on. The voting records support that also.

Park is miles ahead of Maloney in terms of what he did for this franchise. And I mean miles. That doesn't mean he should get a banner, but context is important when evaluating a player's resume and comparing one player to another.

If, if, if. Compelling argument.